Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab

Abstract:
The article is intended to find out the geopolitical implications, regional constraints and benefits
of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Researcher reviewed both published research articles and
books to find out geopolitical implication, regional constraints and benefits of China-Pakistan
Economic Corridor. For this purpose, researcher also reviewed newspapers articles and published
reports by government and non-governmental stakeholders working on CPEC. Review of the
articles and reports indicated that CPEC had enormous benefits not only for China and Pakistan
but also for the whole region. But different internal and external stakeholders are not in favor of
successful completion of this project. Extremism, sense of deprivation, lack of political
consensus, political instability are some of the internal constraints. On the other hand,
Afghanistan, India, Iran, UAE and USA are posing constraints to halt the successful completion
of CPEC.

Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab

Abstract:
China claims South China Sea as its sovereign domain where it possesses the right to intervene
militarily and economically. However, USA considers South China Sea as a common global
passage where rule of law and freedom of navigation should prevail.These diverging viewpoints
coexist in a wobbly peace environment where both US and China want their own version of
international law to be applied and have occasionally resorted to minor armed conflicts over this
issue. Every state claiming authority over South China Sea is willing to use coercion in order to
get what they want, however, the extent of how far they are willing to go is not clear. This is
resulting in a show of gunboat diplomacy involving maritime force of influential states that
strives to manipulate the policy makers of the relevant nations (Costlow, 2012). The paper will
focus on the situation in the South China Sea. South China Sea is not only claimed by China but
various other Asian nations. Does this territorial strife possess the power to turn the region into a
war zone? Being one of the most active trade routes in the world having complicated geography
and the diverging regional and international interests makes it very sensitive area. China being
the emerging economic giant gives competition to the USA in many spheres. Although America
has no territorial claim in the South China Sea, it has strategic and economic interests. Where
China wants a complete hegemonic control of the area, USA wants to find a way where free
unchecked trade could be the future for all.Accompanied with numerous other South Asian
nations claiming various portions of the region, a constant tension exists in the region.

Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab

Abstract:
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a set of projects under China‟s Belt
and Road initiative, marks a new era of economic ties in a bilateral relationship
between the two traditional friends. The multi-dimensional project will not only
reform Pakistan economy but it will serve for people‟s prosperity and will help to
revive the country economy of both countries. The visions of project partners are
clear and the goals of the short term, mid-term and long-term plans of CPEC have
been identified. So, the CPEC is not just a transit route for China and Pakistan‟s
exports but it will transform Pakistan‟s economy and overcome its problems such
as unemployment, energy, underdevelopment, and overall external economic
dependency by building capacity in all necessary sectors. Therefore, CPEC could
promote economic development and growth which will open new avenues and
investment to the country which is based on shared partnership of cooperation,
mutual benefits and sustainability.
Thus, the CPEC is a grand porgramme and will deliver the economic gains to
both China-Pakistan and it can be executed more efficiently and in a balanced way
to serve the interests of both the countries. The project of CPEC is also important
to China‟s energy and strategic security with reference to South China Sea and
other regional and global players. Thus, CPEC could bring economic avenues to
Pakistan and can improve regional economic and trade activities for greater
development and prosperity. It has perceived that the project will not only foster
socio-economic development but it will also reduce the level of political humidity
and will be source of peace and harmony between the traditional adversaries. It has
also assumed that regional economic integration through CPEC could be a
harbinger to resolve the political differences by economic cooperation and regional
economic connection could make 21st century the Asian century setting aside the
perennial political issues to start a new beginning. Thus, in a longer perspective the
CPEC can foster an economic community in the entire region of Asia and beyond
if its vision is materialized in its true sense. The time will prove that the CPEC reap its fruits and will be advantages for not only Pakistan and China but for the
entire region.

Abstract:
Following a relatively successful period for U.S.-South Korea economic
relations under the Bush and Obama administrations, Washington and
Seoul have entered a new period of economic tension in the Trump
administration. Unlike prior U.S. presidents, who placed a priority on
negotiating fair rules in the United States’ economic relationships,
President Trump has prioritized outcomes. As a result, one of his
administration’s earliest moves was to renegotiate the KORUS Free Trade
Agreement. While the results of the renegotiation were modest, they may
help to expand the sale of American automobiles in the Republic of Korea
in the long-run. The largest outcome of the negotiations may be to protect
the Ford Motor Company from South Korean competition in the U.S.
market as the company transitions to sales focused on light trucks. While
the renegotiation has eased tensions for the moment, the prospect of
economic engagement with North Korea, the Trump administration’s
continued use of national security to erect trade barriers, and the
emergence of new technologies such as artificial intelligence and
autonomous vehicles could result in growing tensions in the relationship.

Abstract:
This paper examines the United Nations Development Programme’s role
in South and North Korea’s economic development. The UNDP is not only
the UN’s lead agency for economic and social development, it is one of
the few UN organizations to have worked with both countries in traditional
bilateral arrangements, as well as a in multilateral initiative. Operating in
South Korea from 1963 to 2009, the UNDP contributed to the nation’s
economic development by complimenting the government’s policies.
However, its role was minor compared to the government’s own actions.
Nonetheless, South Korea has served on the UNDP board four times since
its UN admission in 1991, raising the country’s diplomatic standing. After
North Korea joined the UNDP in 1979, the organization’s work in the
country focused on improving food production and supporting industrial
development. These activities helped improve the economic crisis since
the 1990s. In the 1990s, the UNDP provided humanitarian assistance and
scholarships to develop human resources. Pyongyang officials restricted
the UNDP’s work throughout the time it was active in North Korea. These
violations led the UNDP to suspend operations in 2007. Since the early
1990s, the UNDP has supported the Tumen River Area Development
Program, the only initiative that involved the two Koreas, as well as China,
Russia and Mongolia. Although the UNDP facilitated initial contacts, it
was unable to overcome longstanding animosities and disagreements. The
successor Greater Tumen Initiative continues to languish.

Topic:
Economics, Government, United Nations, United Nations Development Program (UNDP)

Abstract:
At the height of the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union used money and weapons to build satellite states; today China and India are using satellites in space to win influence and secure their geo-political and economic interests. They see each other as competition in the global satellite launch business. So how do the Indian and Chinese space programs compare? In which areas is competition likely to be most intense?

Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab

Abstract:
Development of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), with all its associated projects,
favorably influences the geo-strategic and geo-economic prospects of China. Geo-strategic
location of Gwadar further facilitates China to capture transit trade with Central Asia,
Afghanistan and the Middle East and influence this regional accessibility with a viable and
secured corridor for further expansion of regional economic cooperation. Since the emergence of
China as an energy importer in late 90s, it has adopted a „go out‟ strategy to secure energy assets
through procurement and long term energy investment in the energy rich countries, mostly in the
Persian Gulf states and convert historical routes into a modern grid of energy pipelines, roads and
railways for its energy supplies. The strategy aims at using financial means such as building new
seaports, infrastructure development and military and hydrocarbon cooperation between regional
countries to establish an artery for ensuring uninterrupted crude oil supply to its territory. This
Chinese approach has been referred by many intellects around the globe as the revitalization of
the Silk Road Strategy to link China with surrounding regions to generate immense economic
dividends.

Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, Geopolitics, Soft Power

Abstract:
A trifecta of international gatherings – the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders Meeting in Beijing, the East Asia Summit (EAS) in Nay Pyi Taw, and the G-20 gathering in Brisbane – had heads of state from around the globe, including US President Barack Obama, flocking to the Asia-Pacific as 2014 was winding to a close. North Korea was not included in these confabs but its leaders (although not the paramount one) were taking their charm offensive almost everywhere else in an (unsuccessful) attempt to block a UN General Assembly resolution condemning Pyongyang's human rights record. More successful was Pyongyang's (alleged) attempt to undermine and embarrass Sony Studios to block the release of a Hollywood film featuring the assassination of Kim Jong Un.

Abstract:
The Fletcher Security Review: Managed and edited by students
at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, we build on the
Fletcher School’s strong traditions of combining scholarship
with practice, fostering close interdisciplinary collaboration,
and acting as a vehicle for groundbreaking discussion of international security. We believe that by leveraging these strengths
– seeking input from established and up-and-coming scholars,
practitioners, and analysts from around the world on topics deserving of greater attention – we can promote genuinely unique
ways of looking at the future of security.
Each issue of the Review is centered around a broad theme – in
this issue, we tackle “Money & War.” Money influences every
aspect of warfare, conventional or unconventional. No nationstate military, insurgent group, terrorist network, trans-national
criminal organization, or hybrid actor can be understood, or
countered, without knowing where the money is coming from
– as well as where, and how, it gets spent. Evolutions and revolutions in financial tools and practices quickly translate to transformations in military affairs, and some cases, vice versa.

Abstract:
Many Western leaders point to the Arctic as a zone of cooperation—and we have observed such cooperation with the formulation of the Arctic Council, joint scientific endeavors, Search and Rescue agreements, and the very recent Arctic Coast Guard Forum—but disputes between Russia and other Arctic nations in regions to the south have raised concerns in certain quarters. While an ongoing struggle for dominance over the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage and competing continental shelf claims may reflect these tensions, tit-for-tat military exercises and plans for expanded military infrastructure in the Arctic certainly do. The Russian government recently announced completion of a new military base in Franz Josef Land capable of supporting 150 soldiers, as well as its intention to rebuild six existing airfields. While such a nominal increase in military personnel posted to the Arctic may merely be seen as a posturing act, taken in context with Russia’s recent actions in Europe and the Middle East, it might also be seen as a bold move to project power from a previously overlooked region.

Topic:
Security, Economics, International Cooperation, Geopolitics

Political Geography:
Russia, China, Asia, North America, Arctic, United States of America